5 ms·

> if you lack compassion for people who come from less fortunate countries What I'm hearing people saying is that they want a candidate who will talk about com

by aorloff 10y ago

> if you lack compassion for people who come from less fortunate countries What I'm hearing people saying is that they want a candidate who will talk about compassion for the economic futures of Americans. If you are barely making ends meet, you don't want a candidate talking about compassion for people from less fortunate countries, when out in the countryside of America you see a lot of people who could hardly be less fortunate.

chubot 10y ago
Yes, this was in the feedback: “I’d love to see one-tenth of the outrage about the state of our lives out here that you have for Muslims from another country. You have no idea what our lives are like.”
- badsock 10y ago
  I'm very left, but this I completely agree with. The American attitude towards people who are struggling to make ends meet is brutal. If you're having a hard time it's because you're lazy, full stop. And, as clearly evident from their policy, Americans would literally rather see you dead (say, from preventable disease) than lazy.
- intended 10y ago
  But there is outrage over it. Americans have decried the poor state of the rust belt for decades and multiple attempts have been made to save it. Didn't Obama literally inject billions into American car companies to save them? People on HN are either too young or too forgetful. In the era before the internet Fox News was an accomplished craftsmen of the echo chamber. Heck Americans taught me and many other countries how hyper polarized and polarizing news should look like, and that was before the internet. Simply put - liberals could literally repeat a conservative document letter for letter and it would be disowned/ criticized by conservatives. The fact that people believe that liberals care more for Muslim countries is Unsurprising. Liberals wonder why conservatives are so worried about bombing middle eastern countries. People are in their bubbles and keep themselves there
- naravara 10y ago
  >Yes, this was in the feedback: >“I’d love to see one-tenth of the outrage about the state of our lives out here that you have for Muslims from another country. You have no idea what our lives are like.” The Democrats had a debate in Flint about the water crisis where they discussed what to do about it and how the country's infrastructure got there. Meanwhile Donald's fans were screaming "TEN FEET HIGHER!" If GOPers put one-tenth of the outrage about being proactive about the state of their own local economies as they do finding "liberal" scapegoats to blame for their lives being shitty their lives wouldn't have gotten so shitty. I know what their lives are like, but it's hard to keep giving a shit when they keep voting to tell me I'm not a "real" American because I care about gay and minority friends as much as I do about them. AS MUCH. Because they're not special just for being White. Democrats and the left have been bemoaning the decline of the rust belt my entire adult life. The only thing that made their proposals non-starters was the paranoid delusion that there was a secret welfare state for the Blacks holding them down.
  - drewrv 10y ago
    There's a lot of talk about how important it is to listen to Trump supporters, and all it does when I listen to them is terrify me. When I listen to them, I hear people who blame others for their situation, mostly liberals and foreigners. I also hear people who refuse to believe most sources of news and almost all academics. The combination of these things is scary. The fact that they have disproportionate political power and stockpile weaponry is even scarier.
    - rfrank 10y ago
      It's ok, you can find security in your clear sense of smug superiority over them.
  - chubot 10y ago
    Thanks for your viewpoint. I agree there is something odd here. One lesson from this election is how big an influence the media has on politics, and I see this as a huge problem. Honestly it is beyond me why health care reform was so controversial. It seems that Obamacare is flawed, but would be less so if there wasn't so much resistance to it. I don't think it should be a partisan issue but somehow it turned out to be. I would love to see a level headed analysis of what happened.
darkmouth 10y ago
By less fortunate I mean people fleeing war. Refugees. If you think being in a war is same as being poor in the US, you're mistaken.
- true_religion 10y ago
  I think more people would have respect for the plight of Syrian refugees, if broad support of immigration weren't a hallmark of the democratic platform. If the platform was utterly protectionist (or at the very least pragmatic), but made a moral exception for Syrians then it'd be easier to listen to. Instead today, it feels as if supporters of immigration are simply cherry picking the most sympathetic candidates and using them to prop open the door for everyone else. No one lacks sympathy for war refugees, what we all disagree on is where, when, and how such sympathy should be expressed. There are wars happening in our world constantly. Should there be an open door policy to all refugees? Should they ever be expected to leave the country? (some say yes, but I'd argue that after building a life for 5+ years in the US, you ought to given permanent residency). Should there be any kind of screening processes? (after all wars do not erupt from nowhere, some civilians will always support the 'bad' side, even if they eventually become refugees).
- staunch 10y ago
  Have you been poor in the US? Have you lived your entire life in the constant stress of not being able to pay for food, housing, or medical care? Have you had your house repeatedly robbed? Have you been assaulted and mugged walking home? Rejected from every good job because you're uneducated? Spent countless hours cold to the bone because your power got shut off? Had half your friends become drug addicts? Lived without a car or transportation? Have you been totally without hope of a better future? Have you had to fall on the "safety net" of a homeless shelter? Upper class liberals seem to only express interest in groups of people that it makes them feel virtuous to talk about. If you truly care about suffering, you should also open your eyes to the tens of millions of your fellow citizens that need help.
  - leesalminen 10y ago
    Agreed. Poverty in the US is very similar to poverty elsewhere. And hey, if you live in Chicago's south side you're basically in a war zone!
finid 10y ago
If we spent less invading and rebuilding other countries, we'd have more than enough to take care of our less fortunate citizens. That will even reduce the number of the less fortunate from other countries, if you consider that a significant percentage are from countries that we invaded.
normaljoe 10y ago
> If you are barely making ends meet, you don't want a candidate talking about compassion for people from less fortunate countries, when out in the countryside of America you see a lot of people who could hardly be less fortunate. I can understand this statement as my paternal family is indeed in this state and has been for almost a century. They are too proud to take my "handouts" which I offer of around $50 a month. They would be greatly offended if I actually offered what I could afford. I am not a liberal, I am actually a centrist on the upper left hand corner of left wing and libertarian. I have different, but equally heated debates between my liberal and conservative friends. With all of that said I can tell you the following based on my world travels. If you have running water, a flushable toilet, electricity and a foundation in your house you may be US poor, but are most definitely not globally poor. There are more globally poor people in the world then all of the people in the entire US. If you have not lost a house due to tragedy such as tornado, hurricane, fire or bombing then you are not likely to understand the refugee issue. You may think you get it and if you are a liberal I would say you are less likely to get it, based on what my liberal friends say. This kind of loss is not a "set back" and can take years if not a decade to recover from. If you are lucky you have insurance that works and rebuild. If you are in a war zone there is no rebuild. I actually have more Christian conservatives that support refugees as a calling of their faith then liberals that would actually host a refugee. This could vary but it is the case in the area, no SV. At the same time I have more "Christian" evangelicals that want nothing to do with refugees. With all of that said I still don't understand the desire to stay in an economic desert. My paternal side long lost their farm after letting the slaves go yet still have a desire to stay in the same area. I just don't get that. Maybe I am strange but if there are no jobs or economic opportunity why stay? As the libertarian in me why should I care about you choice to stay? If you, or for that fact my family, decide to stay in a place that does not warrant growth why should I sacrifice my liberty for your choice? Why should I not be allowed to support those from forgien lands that I think will increase my community? Why should those that would give up everything to get a change to be here be placed below those that would not even bother to move to a place of greater opportunity less then a 1000 miles away? What is so Holy about the "countryside" that necessitates cities of great wealth from providing to others? Why should my tax dollars grant those whom want comfort to stay in a situation that cannot be pulled out of yet prevent it from providing to those that wish to better themselves? This is not even compassion this is just good business sense and ROI.

by aorloff 10y ago

chubot 10y ago

Yes, this was in the feedback: “I’d love to see one-tenth of the outrage about the state of our lives out here that you have for Muslims from another country. You have no idea what our lives are like.”

badsock 10y ago
I'm very left, but this I completely agree with. The American attitude towards people who are struggling to make ends meet is brutal. If you're having a hard time it's because you're lazy, full stop. And, as clearly evident from their policy, Americans would literally rather see you dead (say, from preventable disease) than lazy.
intended 10y ago
But there is outrage over it. Americans have decried the poor state of the rust belt for decades and multiple attempts have been made to save it. Didn't Obama literally inject billions into American car companies to save them? People on HN are either too young or too forgetful. In the era before the internet Fox News was an accomplished craftsmen of the echo chamber. Heck Americans taught me and many other countries how hyper polarized and polarizing news should look like, and that was before the internet. Simply put - liberals could literally repeat a conservative document letter for letter and it would be disowned/ criticized by conservatives. The fact that people believe that liberals care more for Muslim countries is Unsurprising. Liberals wonder why conservatives are so worried about bombing middle eastern countries. People are in their bubbles and keep themselves there
naravara 10y ago
>Yes, this was in the feedback: >“I’d love to see one-tenth of the outrage about the state of our lives out here that you have for Muslims from another country. You have no idea what our lives are like.” The Democrats had a debate in Flint about the water crisis where they discussed what to do about it and how the country's infrastructure got there. Meanwhile Donald's fans were screaming "TEN FEET HIGHER!" If GOPers put one-tenth of the outrage about being proactive about the state of their own local economies as they do finding "liberal" scapegoats to blame for their lives being shitty their lives wouldn't have gotten so shitty. I know what their lives are like, but it's hard to keep giving a shit when they keep voting to tell me I'm not a "real" American because I care about gay and minority friends as much as I do about them. AS MUCH. Because they're not special just for being White. Democrats and the left have been bemoaning the decline of the rust belt my entire adult life. The only thing that made their proposals non-starters was the paranoid delusion that there was a secret welfare state for the Blacks holding them down.
- drewrv 10y ago
  There's a lot of talk about how important it is to listen to Trump supporters, and all it does when I listen to them is terrify me. When I listen to them, I hear people who blame others for their situation, mostly liberals and foreigners. I also hear people who refuse to believe most sources of news and almost all academics. The combination of these things is scary. The fact that they have disproportionate political power and stockpile weaponry is even scarier.
  - rfrank 10y ago
    It's ok, you can find security in your clear sense of smug superiority over them.
- chubot 10y ago
  Thanks for your viewpoint. I agree there is something odd here. One lesson from this election is how big an influence the media has on politics, and I see this as a huge problem. Honestly it is beyond me why health care reform was so controversial. It seems that Obamacare is flawed, but would be less so if there wasn't so much resistance to it. I don't think it should be a partisan issue but somehow it turned out to be. I would love to see a level headed analysis of what happened.

darkmouth 10y ago

By less fortunate I mean people fleeing war. Refugees. If you think being in a war is same as being poor in the US, you're mistaken.

true_religion 10y ago
I think more people would have respect for the plight of Syrian refugees, if broad support of immigration weren't a hallmark of the democratic platform. If the platform was utterly protectionist (or at the very least pragmatic), but made a moral exception for Syrians then it'd be easier to listen to. Instead today, it feels as if supporters of immigration are simply cherry picking the most sympathetic candidates and using them to prop open the door for everyone else. No one lacks sympathy for war refugees, what we all disagree on is where, when, and how such sympathy should be expressed. There are wars happening in our world constantly. Should there be an open door policy to all refugees? Should they ever be expected to leave the country? (some say yes, but I'd argue that after building a life for 5+ years in the US, you ought to given permanent residency). Should there be any kind of screening processes? (after all wars do not erupt from nowhere, some civilians will always support the 'bad' side, even if they eventually become refugees).
staunch 10y ago
Have you been poor in the US? Have you lived your entire life in the constant stress of not being able to pay for food, housing, or medical care? Have you had your house repeatedly robbed? Have you been assaulted and mugged walking home? Rejected from every good job because you're uneducated? Spent countless hours cold to the bone because your power got shut off? Had half your friends become drug addicts? Lived without a car or transportation? Have you been totally without hope of a better future? Have you had to fall on the "safety net" of a homeless shelter? Upper class liberals seem to only express interest in groups of people that it makes them feel virtuous to talk about. If you truly care about suffering, you should also open your eyes to the tens of millions of your fellow citizens that need help.
- leesalminen 10y ago
  Agreed. Poverty in the US is very similar to poverty elsewhere. And hey, if you live in Chicago's south side you're basically in a war zone!

finid 10y ago

If we spent less invading and rebuilding other countries, we'd have more than enough to take care of our less fortunate citizens. That will even reduce the number of the less fortunate from other countries, if you consider that a significant percentage are from countries that we invaded.

normaljoe 10y ago

> If you are barely making ends meet, you don't want a candidate talking about compassion for people from less fortunate countries, when out in the countryside of America you see a lot of people who could hardly be less fortunate. I can understand this statement as my paternal family is indeed in this state and has been for almost a century. They are too proud to take my "handouts" which I offer of around $50 a month. They would be greatly offended if I actually offered what I could afford. I am not a liberal, I am actually a centrist on the upper left hand corner of left wing and libertarian. I have different, but equally heated debates between my liberal and conservative friends. With all of that said I can tell you the following based on my world travels. If you have running water, a flushable toilet, electricity and a foundation in your house you may be US poor, but are most definitely not globally poor. There are more globally poor people in the world then all of the people in the entire US. If you have not lost a house due to tragedy such as tornado, hurricane, fire or bombing then you are not likely to understand the refugee issue. You may think you get it and if you are a liberal I would say you are less likely to get it, based on what my liberal friends say. This kind of loss is not a "set back" and can take years if not a decade to recover from. If you are lucky you have insurance that works and rebuild. If you are in a war zone there is no rebuild. I actually have more Christian conservatives that support refugees as a calling of their faith then liberals that would actually host a refugee. This could vary but it is the case in the area, no SV. At the same time I have more "Christian" evangelicals that want nothing to do with refugees. With all of that said I still don't understand the desire to stay in an economic desert. My paternal side long lost their farm after letting the slaves go yet still have a desire to stay in the same area. I just don't get that. Maybe I am strange but if there are no jobs or economic opportunity why stay? As the libertarian in me why should I care about you choice to stay? If you, or for that fact my family, decide to stay in a place that does not warrant growth why should I sacrifice my liberty for your choice? Why should I not be allowed to support those from forgien lands that I think will increase my community? Why should those that would give up everything to get a change to be here be placed below those that would not even bother to move to a place of greater opportunity less then a 1000 miles away? What is so Holy about the "countryside" that necessitates cities of great wealth from providing to others? Why should my tax dollars grant those whom want comfort to stay in a situation that cannot be pulled out of yet prevent it from providing to those that wish to better themselves? This is not even compassion this is just good business sense and ROI.